Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
be wise to look beyond the fiscal cliff because all the fears it's tomorrow doing the economy are misplaced. >> most economists have said if we go into 2013 without a deal we'll go into recession. >> we might have into 2013 for three days or knife days or a week before there's a deal. that's about it. the pressure from financial markets will be too great so the scenario that you just referred to to, we go over the cliff, had and the economy sinks. i want to emphasize that cannot happen. >> let me move on to another topic. timothy geithner has said he's not returning for another four years. your name has been mentioned as a replacement. >> of course they are not going to make any changes during that team during the pennedsy of all of this. the president has lots of good choices for whatever comes next. i very much doubt that i'll be part of that but they are in good shape and they don't have anything to do about this. do youly jack lew would be a good treasury secretary. fiscal issues will continue to be and the for foernt even after after agreement on the cliff and the preside
cliff? are you expecting the economy to go over the fiscal cliff and see these taxes go high hadder and spending cuts take effect? >> my personal view is i'm still optimistic. i think the conversation has been constructive since. do we have a solution on the table yet? no. but i'm optimistic we'll get to a framework. >> why? >> there's been enough dialogue. there's been movement. everyone seems to recognize the problem. everybody realizes there has to be a revenue component, spend component, entitlement reform component. for us, the business community and all the ceos, certainty is the greatest stimulus for us. >> do you support tax rates going higher? >> me personally, as an individual, more importantly the business community, which i'm part of. we support something inclusive. if rates were higher in a videocasset vacuum, i'm not sure we'd be supportive of that. we have to make sure the consumers, those who spends a lot of the dollars, the middle class, are protected in this exercise. >> i guess the question i'm really getting at is, do you get the revenue from tax increases or fro
to understand given how much going over the fiscal cliff would hurt the economy. why is going over the fiscal cliff worth it for just this one component? if you can get the other components, why wouldn't you take that? >> good question. thanks for asking. what we're trying to do is put in place a comprehensive balance set of fiscal reforms that put us back on the path to living within our means and create room for investing to make the economy stronger, make sure we're protecting medicare for future generations, and forcing the government to use the taxpayers' resources more wisely. in that context, you have to have a significant amount of revenues. we don't see a way of doing it that makes any sense or has any political viability without rates going up as part of that deal. again, the size of the problem in some sense is so large it can't be solved without rates going up. i think there's a broad recognition of that reality now. if you listen carefully to the talk not just in this town, but you hear what businesses and investors say, i think there's broad recognition that rates are going to g
have had otherwise. just imagine that. the fiscal cliff is going cost the economy in that order of magnitude, 3 million jobs. we should not, not, not go over that cliff. now -- >> by the same token, though, his point about -- and i don't want to make this about ed. the fact remains that the debt levels we have in this country in effect put a cap on growth right now. >> sure, sure, sure. i think that economists have been saying for years -- i have said repeatedly, economists on both sides of the aisle have said repeatedly what we need is a long-term plan for deficit reduction that begins to take effect when the economy is closer to its capacity. right now it's at least 6% below its capacity. the unemployment rate, 7.7, it should be like 5.7 at capacity. we should not be doing a lot of deficit reduction right now. we want to sends a credible message to markets that we're serious about deficit reduction, but to put it in place in that brutal way, $600 billion next year, forget it. that's not good economics. >> there is a school of thought that says that we just have to get used to
stimulating the economy without government interference. i think the thing to do is go right over the fiscal cliff. you'll raise some taxes, yes, that's true, you'll cut defense and some human services. this is the only way we'll have a significant bite out of this deficit. i think the market is going to like this. they say no right now, but when they see that this government is taking on the deficit in a serious way i think they will like it >> you don't think going over the cliff is armageddon? >> this is just nonsense, absolutely not. this is a bipartisan deal that was made. now both parties are trying to welch on their commitments. i think that's a mistake. >> steve, ben bernanke said today if we do go over the fiscal cliff, even if it's for a short period of time, it's going to be very costly and they do not have the tools to basically dig us out of it. do you believe if we go over the fiscal cliff it won't be as easy as the governor is suggesting? >> we're in trouble anyway this quarter and the next quarter and putting on taxes of any kind would be the wrong thing to do. sometimes the
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5